16 ms·

> The utxo model was no mistake. It works well with pure value transfers and offers a refreshing take on general-purpose programming on chain. > [..] > The do

> The utxo model was no mistake. It works well with pure value transfers and offers a refreshing take on general-purpose programming on chain. > [..] > The downsides of this model are the mirror image of their strengths. The functional style is alien to most developers, and it hinders complicated interactions and integrations that are dominant in mainstream blockchain programming. There are more downsides than that. The eUTxO model is not equivalent to accounts when it comes to its capabilities for building dApps. I explained it in more detail recently in a problem statement document for Cardano: https://github.com/cardano-foundation/CIPs/pull/874 https://github.com/cardano-foundation/CIPs/pull/874

pavlov 2y ago
I don’t think I’ve heard “dApp” since 2021. It feels weirdly nostalgic, almost like the other frontpage story about writing CP/M programs. The world has moved on but someone is still pushing this rock.
CuriousCosmic 2y ago
> There are more downsides than that. The eUTxO model is not equivalent to accounts when it comes to its capabilities for building dApps. > I explained it in more detail recently in a problem statement document for Cardano: https://github.com/cardano-foundation/CIPs/pull/874 https://github.com/cardano-foundation/CIPs/pull/874 I think I'm siding with Michele in this situation that what you describe as a problem is rather just a UX painpoint of UTXO and not a flaw or issue that needs to be fundamentally changed. If you want to be able to coordinate to construct transactions you need to do it off-chain. The network can have standard systems for doing that or for verifying content (ex: DA-ed data that doesn't commit to L1) but any transactions that are settling on chain need to be 100% deterministic.
- klntsky 2y ago
  > any transactions that are settling on chain need to be 100% deterministic. If "100% deterministic" means absence of shared mutable state, then this approach will surely lead nowhere in the DeFi context, because even a proper order book with immediate execution AND partial order filling is impossible to build. If partial order filling is allowed, then either - order execution is not permissionless (no "De" in "DeFi") - which basically means the batcher can exploit users (and there have been claims that one of the Cardano DEXes does exactly that) - or orders are censorable (one can delay the market pressure indefinitely by filling a large order for $0.001 repeatedly) If partial order filling is not allowed, that would give an insanely inefficient price discovery (basically an OTC situation). I recommend you to take a look at the current state of DeFi on Cardano vs. account-based chains

pavlov 2y ago

I don’t think I’ve heard “dApp” since 2021. It feels weirdly nostalgic, almost like the other frontpage story about writing CP/M programs. The world has moved on but someone is still pushing this rock.

CuriousCosmic 2y ago

> There are more downsides than that. The eUTxO model is not equivalent to accounts when it comes to its capabilities for building dApps. > I explained it in more detail recently in a problem statement document for Cardano: https://github.com/cardano-foundation/CIPs/pull/874 https://github.com/cardano-foundation/CIPs/pull/874 I think I'm siding with Michele in this situation that what you describe as a problem is rather just a UX painpoint of UTXO and not a flaw or issue that needs to be fundamentally changed. If you want to be able to coordinate to construct transactions you need to do it off-chain. The network can have standard systems for doing that or for verifying content (ex: DA-ed data that doesn't commit to L1) but any transactions that are settling on chain need to be 100% deterministic.

klntsky 2y ago
> any transactions that are settling on chain need to be 100% deterministic. If "100% deterministic" means absence of shared mutable state, then this approach will surely lead nowhere in the DeFi context, because even a proper order book with immediate execution AND partial order filling is impossible to build. If partial order filling is allowed, then either - order execution is not permissionless (no "De" in "DeFi") - which basically means the batcher can exploit users (and there have been claims that one of the Cardano DEXes does exactly that) - or orders are censorable (one can delay the market pressure indefinitely by filling a large order for $0.001 repeatedly) If partial order filling is not allowed, that would give an insanely inefficient price discovery (basically an OTC situation). I recommend you to take a look at the current state of DeFi on Cardano vs. account-based chains